Starbucks Organizational Structure and Management Functions
This paper examines Starbucks Corporation's organizational structure and application of core management functions—planning, organizing, leading, and controlling. The company operates with a geographic divisional structure and highly centralized strategic planning, primarily driven by CEO Howard Schultz's vision. While this model has enabled rapid global expansion and strong brand consistency, the paper identifies three critical challenges: a weak leadership pipeline that leaves the company vulnerable if Schultz departs, the need for organizational restructuring to support emerging business segments like Teavana, and the difficulty of maintaining service quality standards as the workforce expands. Recommendations focus on decentralizing decision-making to develop future leaders, reorganizing divisions to reflect business growth outside coffee, and intensifying training and quality control investments to preserve brand premium positioning.
- General Description: Starbucks' industry position, business model, and competitive strategy
- Management Functions and Structure: How planning, organizing, leading, and controlling operate across company hierarchy
- Strategic Recommendations: Succession planning, divisional restructuring, and quality maintenance priorities
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds abstract analysis in concrete facts: store counts by region, revenue breakdowns, and specific strategic decisions (e.g., China division reorganization, Teavana acquisition) make the organizational structure tangible rather than theoretical.
- Clear identification of a core tension: the paper recognizes that Starbucks' centralized model has driven success but simultaneously creates organizational vulnerability—a mature insight that moves beyond simple description.
- Practical recommendations tied directly to structural diagnosis: each suggestion (leadership pipeline, divisional restructuring, quality maintenance) addresses a real gap revealed in the analysis rather than offering generic advice.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper uses the four management functions (planning, organizing, leading, controlling) as an analytical framework to systematically decompose how Starbucks operates. Rather than listing these functions abstractly, the author grounds each in organizational practice: showing where planning happens (head office), how organizing occurs at regional and local levels, how leadership is centralized around Schultz's vision, and how control is proprietary and understated. This functional decomposition reveals both strengths and risks in a way that pure structural description would miss.
Structure breakdown
The essay follows a standard business case analysis: (1) General Description establishes the company's industry position, business model, customer base, and key resources; (2) Management Functions section applies the four-function framework to explain how decision authority is distributed; (3) Recommendations proposes specific improvements to address identified gaps. The flow moves from understanding what Starbucks is, to how it is managed, to what could be better—a logical progression suitable for organizational decision-makers.
General Description
Starbucks is a company operating in the quick service restaurant business, where it ranks as the third-largest firm in the industry in the U.S. by revenue (Oches, 2014). The company is publicly traded on the NASDAQ under the ticker symbol SBUX, with a 97.33% float and 2.74% insider ownership (MSN Moneycentral, 2014).
With 191,000 employees, Starbucks was formed in 1985 in its current organization, though it traces its roots to the early 1970s. The company was reorganized after Howard Schultz adopted the name and applied it to his coffee chain vision. Today, Starbucks operates in 65 countries around the world (MSN Moneycentral, 2014). The company operates both company-owned and franchised stores, with distribution varying by region. Overall, there are 19,767 stores: 10,194 (52%) are company-owned, and the remainder are franchise stores. In the Americas, 60% of stores are company-owned. In Europe and the Middle East, 57% of stores are franchised. In Asia-Pacific, 77% of stores are franchised. Starbucks also operates other segments, including juice and tea brands, most of which are company-owned (Starbucks 2013 Annual Report).
Teavana, a brand acquired in 2012, represents the company's strategy to apply its core competencies in coffee to establish teahouses (Choi & Skidmore, 2012). The company has also acquired a juice business to diversify within the beverage sector (Jargon, 2011).
The major growth markets for Starbucks are China, which received 206 new stores in 2013, and the U.S., which received 193 new stores. Canada, Mexico, and South Korea are also significant growth markets. The revenue split is 74% beverages, 20% food, 3% packaged coffees, and 3% merchandise and equipment (2013 Starbucks Annual Report). Beyond retail operations, Starbucks generates revenue through the K-cup single-serve coffee system and a licensing agreement with Pepsi for Starbucks-branded beverages. These businesses generated approximately $1.42 billion in revenue and $415 million in net income in 2013. The company overall earned revenue of $16.447 billion in fiscal year 2014 with net income of $2.068 billion, representing significant improvement from 2013, when the company absorbed a $2.7 billion charge related to terminating a distribution deal with Kraft to gain control over its packaged products (Schultz, 2013).
Starbucks' customer base is generally middle class and consistent across geographies. The company competes with a differentiated strategy, positioning its goods at a premium through branding, service quality, and unique experience. The Starbucks experience defines the company's service proposition (Michelli, 2007). The brand symbolizes affordable luxury and middle-class belonging—the ability to afford premium coffee and service within a quick service model accessible to mainstream customers. Starbucks appeals to both urban and suburban markets, with increasing rural presence. The target market is middle-income or higher, consists of repeat customers with high loyalty, and lives or works near a location; customers do not typically travel far for Starbucks. The typical customer is of working age, has or is pursuing a college education, and values consistency and reliability in the purchasing experience. The targeting strategy itself was unique when Starbucks expanded in the 1990s; many competitors now attempt to replicate the model.
Most competitors are either mom-and-pop operations emphasizing anti-chain positioning or regional chains attempting to emulate the Starbucks model. Starbucks is substantially larger than these competitors. In the coffee quick service market, the most serious competitors are McDonald's, particularly since it introduced the McCafé concept (Lim, 2014). While McDonald's is larger overall, the majority of its revenue comes from burger sales, making it much smaller in coffee. Dunkin' Donuts and Tim Hortons also compete in the quick service top 50, but operate in the donut-shop/coffeeshop model, which targets a more mainstream market than Starbucks and rarely converts Starbucks customers. This is because Starbucks' aspirational positioning creates a sense of class distinction compared to downmarket alternatives (Lim, 2014).
The key resources for Starbucks are its brand, its people, and its products. The brand is perhaps most critical. In quick service, the brand is what customers purchase—it represents a promise of consistent product and experience. When this experience is replicated across locations, it reduces customer purchase risk; customers know what to expect when entering any Starbucks. This consistency is essential for franchising, as it allows rapid geographic expansion while maintaining market perception (Michelli, 2007). The company's ability to create markets where few or none existed—in the U.S., Japan, and China—demonstrates strong management skill and market understanding. Interestingly, Starbucks has struggled in regions with established coffee cultures, maintaining few stores in Australia and none in Italy.
The company's training programs have been a key strength, though they face pressure as the organization grows. Starbucks attracts talent by offering superior benefits and working environment compared to most quick service competitors. This allows the company to recruit higher-caliber employees, train them to superior standards, and deliver service exceeding lower-end competitors. However, scaling training while maintaining quality is increasingly challenging.
Starbucks operates with a geographic organizational structure. Since other segments remain too small to warrant major structural recognition, the company's primary divisions are the Americas, Europe/Middle East/Africa, and China/Asia-Pacific. While regional strategies are developed locally, major decisions are made at headquarters to maintain centralized control over resource deployment.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.